- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Five things every Linux distribution should do
|
|
|
Comments (10)
Yes, I also noticed that there were only 3 points in the article. Maybe the author ran out of more things to say, but forgot to change the headline.
I didn't like the proposal to make Linux distributions more homogeneous. One of Linux's great strengths is its diversity.
I didn't like the proposal to make Linux distributions more homogeneous. One of Linux's great strengths is its diversity.
Velveeta Linux! Bland, gooey, non-nourishing, and no distinguishing features whatsoever! Sounds like a weiner to me!
Talking about "operating systems" is like talking about "vehicles". In the same way that it would not make sense to talk about eliminating dump trucks and standardizing on bicycles, it doesn't make sense to refer to Ubuntu, Zenwalk, Scientific Linux, and Gentoo as if they are the same product. True, they are all called "Linux", but dump trucks and bicycles are both called "vehicles". Slackware is perfect for my needs. I'm under no illusion that more than a small handful of all Linux users will find Slackware appealing.
Disclaimer: This is a response to the posts here. I don't waste time reading articles like this.
Disclaimer: This is a response to the posts here. I don't waste time reading articles like this.
Still pertinent bigg. I have used more distros than I care to try and remember. Some good, some bad, come niche. A also know that I dont recommend my daily driver for someone new to linux, I'll point them to Mandriva or *buntu. But that is the strength not the weakness of Linux, it can be anything for anyone at any time, but it is not everything for everyone at once.
Why I stick with Gentoo flavors anymore, its exactly what I make it, but I spent more than a few years playing around until I discovered what it was I was really looking for ... which was perfection wholly on my terms and by my hands.
Why I stick with Gentoo flavors anymore, its exactly what I make it, but I spent more than a few years playing around until I discovered what it was I was really looking for ... which was perfection wholly on my terms and by my hands.
az, just out of curiosity: Have you tried Slackware? I've heard the same thing said about it (by caitlyn, I think), although I use it just because you never forget your first love.
Yup, although to be honest I should probably revisit it again, its been awhile.
Distros have become "Themes".
How so, tuxtom? Got any examples? I'm curious to see someone call it a "theme."
Actually, the preferred term for a customized Fedora is "spin." And on Ubuntu, it's "remix."
Actually, the preferred term for a customized Fedora is "spin." And on Ubuntu, it's "remix."
It's quite simple to see what tuxtom means. (S)He wrote his/her opinion, no examples are necessary. lol.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
What I didn't do is call on distro makers to unify or standardize based on my personal preferences. I also didn't make up my own facts about the past. Perhaps vasanth only knew about five "popular" distros in 2000 but I knew of many more. Caldera OpenLinux, Turbolinux, and Storm Linux were all popular at that time. I could list many more that were less popular. The idea that the five he lists can be compared to the 296 active distros on DistroWatch, which includes some awfully obscure names, is ridiculous.
Second, the best Control Panel I've seen yet, simple enough for almost anyone to understand yet having enough flexibility for more advanced users, is the one in Wolvix. I don't see anything wrong with distros having their own GUI tools to distinguish themselves in any case. Let the community and the market decide which is best.
One size fits all installers won't work on all hardware either. Many of the 296 distros are niche distros for specialized uses and/or specialized hardware. How would you shoehorn those into a standard installer?
Why must a menu system look like the Windows menu system? Why must distros agree on what apps should be popular and which ones get relegated to extra?
DId anyone else notice that the author can't even count to five. He said there were five areas that needed to be standardized and promptly listed a total of three.
Thanks but no thanks. One of the best things about Linux is choice. Don't lock me into your Windows-like choices.